When Equipment Has Gone Too Far

[North Butte]

Because you're worried that people putting on televised golf entertainment may want to play longer courses than the ones you want to see them play, therefore the other 99.99999% of golfers in the world ought to play a rolled-back ball.

 

Talk about getting the cart before the horse, geez...

 

It continues to astound me that people who would bother to participate in an online golfer's forum consider televised Tour golf to be the most important thing about the game.

[gvogel]

Because you're worried that people putting on televised golf entertainment may want to play longer courses than the ones you want to see them play, therefore the other 99.99999% of golfers in the world ought to play a rolled-back ball.

 

Talk about getting the cart before the horse, geez...

 

It continues to astound me that people who would bother to participate in an online golfer's forum consider televised Tour golf to be the most important thing about the game.

 

It continues to astound me that so many average golfers, like me, are reluctant to move up a set of tees if that is what is needed to preserve the present length of golf courses for better players. And I include the kids at my local course who are hitting the ball 285 - 290. And the college golfers, and highly skilled amateurs.

[North Butte]

I like seeing my golf ball fly 200 yards if I catch one flush. I'd enjoy it even more if it flew 220 yards but that's beyond my means. I would enjoy it less if it flew 180 yards.

 

How is that hard to understand. How can you lose sight of the most elemental charm of the game? Propelling a ball by your own strength, through the air and getting it close to a spot you were aiming at waaaaaaaaaay over yonder?

 

There are plenty of highly skilled golfers who play my under-7,000 yard home course, hit the ball 285-290 and find it a fair challenge. There is absolutely zero need on my local level for courses longer than 7,000 yards.

[North Butte]

We have dueling selfish agendas here (if you can call not wishing to do anything an "agenda").

 

I do not want to suddenly see my golf ball flying 20 or 30 yards shorter than it has done. That idea bothers the heck out of me.

 

You do not like the clubs that some TV announcer tells you Dustin Johnson is hitting for his approach shots. That seems to bother the heck out of you.

 

Pardon me if I think my "agenda" is a bit more realistic and yours is rather fanciful.

[BrockPSU]

If you move up a set of tees to adjust for the equipment your using are you not just doing the same thing by using better equipment and being on the back tees? Why would you ever want to go back in time when every sport is advancing? That is the main problem with golfers that think the distance people are hitting it is an issue. If golf goes back to hitting older equipment, I guarantee that the sport will die. There are very few people that would still play and keep the sport alive. I know in my area golf courses are struggling and I'm sure its not the only area. You go back to old equipment, you can easily see losing multiple courses if not all just because nobody wants to play equipment that is not advanced after having that already. The difference between golf now and golf in the older days with worse equipment is the greens. Greens were easier back then and not running nearly as fast as they are now. IMO golf equipment should keep improving so then the greens can become harder and harder making the game come down to what it should be and what most people are striving for in decreasing the equipment, which is the "short game".

[North Butte]

Especially on modern courses with water hazards everywhere, can you imagine telling some old guy who can barely make the 100-yard carry of a pond in front of a green that he needs a ball that flies 10-15 yards shorter?

 

Oh wait, I know. You can build him a new pitch-and-putt tee on the other side of the pond, thereby saving lots of money to make the game cheaper.

[gvogel]

Here is a story that you may, or may not, find interesting.

 

A little more than 35 years ago, I was out of college and looking for something besides hockey to do in the winter. So I took up squash.

 

when I started playing squash, the game in North America was played with a pretty hard ball, on the old North American courts, which were relatively narrow. That's the game that we played.

 

Some of us continued to play a bit in the summer. The problem with that is that the North American ball became a "super ball" in warm conditions. It was a crazy game. The ball was so fast and rebounded around the court so much that it sort of destroyed the game. So we soon realized that if we used the "soft" international ball, the summer game was a better game.

 

As squash was spreading to the West coast and warmer regions, I guess that most players soon decided that the international ball was better. Being softer, it could not be hit has hard, giving players who could move - retrievers - a chance to prolong rallys because the ball stayed up a fraction longer. I am sure that the power hitters didn't like losing their hitting advantage, but over time the game changed to the international soft ball exclusively. Hitters still had an advantage, but retrievers could play as well. There was resistance at first. Now all new squash courts are built on the international model - wider - to accommodate the soft ball.

 

Who knows? Maybe a softer golf ball would result in a better game overall.

[Sean2]

The vast majority of people who play golf don't hit the ball that far anyway, and for the most part play the "wrong" tees for how far they do hit the ball. I am very realistic about how far (or not how far...lol) I hit the ball. Dialing the ball back will only frustrate the majority of recreational golfers...and this game is frustrating enough.

 

I have said it numerous times, courses don't need to be made longer...look at Merion and Harbour Town...and at many Tour venues they cut and roll the fairways so the players get a hefty amount of bounce/roll (supposedly good for TV).

 

It's like the "groove rule". The recreational golfer has a difficult of enough time spinning the ball around the green as it is, so the USGA in it's infinite wisdom decided to make it even harder, and the players the rule was supposed to affect made absolutely no difference whatsoever.

 

If we are dialing back the ball, why not make the hole a bit smaller while we are at it. lol

[Shilgy]

 

By the way, after reading Tom Wishon's comments above about hitting shots - every once in awhile - as good as a tour pro, I have come around to the opinion that the equipment should be changed for everyone, not just pros.

 

 

When Tom says we hit a shot as good as the pros he meant the result is the same. Perhaps a hole in one or a very near approach. Not a pro quality strike. That has nothing to do with equipment. Lol that's more a random event. The ball has to finish somewhere and occasionally you get a good result.

[sdandrea]

Me and my golfing contemporaries are retired people in our 60's, 70s and even 80s. The last thing we want/need is for the ball to travel a shorter distance. It's hard enough to score well and many of us are on our last set of tees.

[bladehunter]

i think what you guys would find is that on average you would hit it farther with MORE spin..... high speed guys would lose distance..and the ones here griping about possibly loosing distance would actually hit it farther in the air once they got the fit dialed in...

[bladehunter]

There's no doubting that technology has taken wind and spin and muted them both. As a hazard, as an obstacle, as an intended design aspect, as a part of the challenge, they have been reeled in.

 

Added rough, speedy greens and 8000 yard tee boxes do not replace what is lost. Creativity and strategy has taken a hit with it too. A dynamic wild card has been done away with especially on the Tour level.

 

There's nothing backwards, nostalgic or parochial about acknowledging it.

 

Good lord. That isn't how physics works. If the ball is flying farther, its effected the same by a smaller wind effect. If I hit a ball 400 yards in 2% wind I have to factor in the wind just as much as a roughly 260 yard ball in 4% wind. You can't say that wind matters less and the ball is flying farther at the same time, without some serious scientific results to back that up. The longer the ball is in the air the more it is effected by wind, so the carry increase is offsetting the ball pretty significantly.

 

There is a ton backwards, nostalgic or parochial about acknowledging it. The game has changed a lot since 1900 and in 3017 it will be a lot different from now. Not worse, just different. In fact, your post is kinda the definition of nostalgic and parochial (I'd also add condescending, but w/e). Its like when people say "I just want X, is that so selfish?" - well, yeah, its the very definition of selfish. "No matter what they do, the version of golf I watched and I like is the best is changing and we're losing something no matter what" is literally the definition of backwards, nostalgic nonsense. Its OK, you can think that (I do about tennis) but at least own it. Don't act like you're not being the old fogey, nostalgic "we had to walk in 10 miles of snow to school" guy.

 

Your version of golf is not the best version, just like 1910 wasn't the best, and 2017 isn't the best. They are all different.

There's no doubting that technology has taken wind and spin and muted them both. As a hazard, as an obstacle, as an intended design aspect, as a part of the challenge, they have been reeled in.

 

Added rough, speedy greens and 8000 yard tee boxes do not replace what is lost. Creativity and strategy has taken a hit with it too. A dynamic wild card has been done away with especially on the Tour level.

 

There's nothing backwards, nostalgic or parochial about acknowledging it.

 

Good lord. That isn't how physics works. If the ball is flying farther, its effected the same by a smaller wind effect. If I hit a ball 400 yards in 2% wind I have to factor in the wind just as much as a roughly 260 yard ball in 4% wind. You can't say that wind matters less and the ball is flying farther at the same time, without some serious scientific results to back that up. The longer the ball is in the air the more it is effected by wind, so the carry increase is offsetting the ball pretty significantly.

 

There is a ton backwards, nostalgic or parochial about acknowledging it. The game has changed a lot since 1900 and in 3017 it will be a lot different from now. Not worse, just different. In fact, your post is kinda the definition of nostalgic and parochial (I'd also add condescending, but w/e). Its like when people say "I just want X, is that so selfish?" - well, yeah, its the very definition of selfish. "No matter what they do, the version of golf I watched and I like is the best is changing and we're losing something no matter what" is literally the definition of backwards, nostalgic nonsense. Its OK, you can think that (I do about tennis) but at least own it. Don't act like you're not being the old fogey, nostalgic "we had to walk in 10 miles of snow to school" guy.

 

Your version of golf is not the best version, just like 1910 wasn't the best, and 2017 isn't the best. They are all different.

 

 

isnt both sides of this selfish though? how can it not be? change isnt always best...why cant 1997 be the best? it may not be , but it isnt automatically not because it isnt current .

 

 

( cant triple stamp a double stamp..no takebacks...no cutsies..lol)

[North Butte]

Believe it or don’t, the changes in equipment and golf balls were not done just out of spite. If the vast majority of golfers had not voted with their pocketbooks in favor of graphite, titanium and the ProV1 then those things would have gone the way of single-length clubs, fiberglass shafts and other fads that pop up and disappear at random.

 

If the clubs that were popular in 1997 were better than the ones sold today, that’s the clubs we’d all be using.

 

You lot are demanding that the Big Bad USGA come stamping in and force the 99% who gladly adopted the current equipment to give it up so the 1% can have their way.

[bladehunter]

as i said before bifurcation is good in my book.... everybody wins that way...unless you dont think that the 99% would continue to vote together?

[radiman]

as i said before bifurcation is good in my book.... everybody wins that way...unless you dont think that the 99% would continue to vote together?

 

I don't understand why that keeps getting thrown around. What exactly is it going to protect? Age old records? So what if scores drop a little. It doesn't render these courses obsolete because the average score is a couple strokes lower. I'd rather see the setups of the courses themselves change before equipment. Let the fairways and rough grow out a bit. Narrow the fairways. Put an emphasis on hitting it straight and staying out of the rough. There are a lot of things that can be done before they start restricting equipment that has been perfectly legal for decades.

[bladehunter]

as i said before bifurcation is good in my book.... everybody wins that way...unless you dont think that the 99% would continue to vote together?

 

I don't understand why that keeps getting thrown around. What exactly is it going to protect? Age old records? So what if scores drop a little. It doesn't render these courses obsolete because the average score is a couple strokes lower. I'd rather see the setups of the courses themselves change before equipment. Let the fairways and rough grow out a bit. Narrow the fairways. Put an emphasis on hitting it straight and staying out of the rough. There are a lot of things that can be done before they start restricting equipment that has been perfectly legal for decades.

 

 

which part that keeps getting brought up? Bifurcation? it already exists.... plenty ofpeople play irons and wedges that arent legal for top use...why not drivers and balls?

[radiman]

as i said before bifurcation is good in my book.... everybody wins that way...unless you dont think that the 99% would continue to vote together?

 

I don't understand why that keeps getting thrown around. What exactly is it going to protect? Age old records? So what if scores drop a little. It doesn't render these courses obsolete because the average score is a couple strokes lower. I'd rather see the setups of the courses themselves change before equipment. Let the fairways and rough grow out a bit. Narrow the fairways. Put an emphasis on hitting it straight and staying out of the rough. There are a lot of things that can be done before they start restricting equipment that has been perfectly legal for decades.

 

 

which part that keeps getting brought up? Bifurcation? it already exists.... plenty ofpeople play irons and wedges that arent legal for top use...why not drivers and balls?

 

High COR drivers haven't exactly taken off. They already have the opportunity to play such clubs. I have yet to see one in the wild. In regards to wedges, I've see them in play. But, it's in the bag of a player with a 10 year old driver and 20 year old putter. When it comes to them buying a new one some day, I highly doubt they'll be seeking out something that fits outside the new groove rule. Chances are, they'll go for there newest Vokey on the shelf, or Cleveland, or Callaway, etc. You know, the same one they see the pros play.

 

For instance, my wedges were stolen last year. With so little time left in the season, I opted to use the only wedges I had in my basement. They happen to be the old grooves. I'll be replacing them when the season starts. I will be going to the local shop and buying a set with current grooves. For one, because I don't want to feel like I'm at an advantage over anyone I play with. And two, I don't know if there are any manufacturers that even use the old grooves.

[bladehunter]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

[radiman]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

 

While that may be true, I feel like the steps needed to get the game where people seem to want it to be would be too drastic. An amateur would wig out if every new driver they tried was 20 yards shorter than what they have.

 

I have no issue with further restrictions to limit future gains. My problem comes when they deem already legal equipment as no longer conforming. Especially when these rules are being made with pros in mind. They are a piece of the pie, but the amateur golfer is the heart of this game. Without them, the game dies.

[new2g0lf]

Because you're worried that people putting on televised golf entertainment may want to play longer courses than the ones you want to see them play, therefore the other 99.99999% of golfers in the world ought to play a rolled-back ball.

 

Talk about getting the cart before the horse, geez...

 

It continues to astound me that people who would bother to participate in an online golfer's forum consider televised Tour golf to be the most important thing about the game.

 

It continues to astound me that so many average golfers, like me, are reluctant to move up a set of tees if that is what is needed to preserve the present length of golf courses for better players. And I include the kids at my local course who are hitting the ball 285 - 290. And the college golfers, and highly skilled amateurs.

 

Why are you so worried about the length of golf courses the pro's play?

[bladehunter]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

 

While that may be true, I feel like the steps needed to get the game where people seem to want it to be would be too drastic. An amateur would wig out if every new driver they tried was 20 yards shorter than what they have.

 

I have no issue with further restrictions to limit future gains. My problem comes when they deem already legal equipment as no longer conforming. Especially when these rules are being made with pros in mind. They are a piece of the pie, but the amateur golfer is the heart of this game. Without them, the game dies.

 

 

 

i agree again... some would wig out.. but i dont know a single person who would actually stop playing... and as you said when the time came...go to the shop and buy new... I dont know if it should be done...But it could be done... Ive heard others argue that it would kill the game... or kill new club sales... I just dont believe that .... people buy what the stars play... and if anything it would increase sales for a time...

[new2g0lf]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

 

While that may be true, I feel like the steps needed to get the game where people seem to want it to be would be too drastic. An amateur would wig out if every new driver they tried was 20 yards shorter than what they have.

 

I have no issue with further restrictions to limit future gains. My problem comes when they deem already legal equipment as no longer conforming. Especially when these rules are being made with pros in mind. They are a piece of the pie, but the amateur golfer is the heart of this game. Without them, the game dies.

 

 

 

i agree again... some would wig out.. but i dont know a single person who would actually stop playing... and as you said when the time came...go to the shop and buy new... I dont know if it should be done...But it could be done... Ive heard others argue that it would kill the game... or kill new club sales... I just dont believe that .... people buy what the stars play... and if anything it would increase sales for a time...

 

It would kill new club sales, no one would willingly spend money on clubs that are shorter than their current club. It would also create all sorts of problems with club and amateur tournaments regarding what equipment was permitted. Will be fun to watch pro tournaments where the pro's can't out drive the best local amateurs, what a joke.

[bladehunter]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

 

While that may be true, I feel like the steps needed to get the game where people seem to want it to be would be too drastic. An amateur would wig out if every new driver they tried was 20 yards shorter than what they have.

 

I have no issue with further restrictions to limit future gains. My problem comes when they deem already legal equipment as no longer conforming. Especially when these rules are being made with pros in mind. They are a piece of the pie, but the amateur golfer is the heart of this game. Without them, the game dies.

 

 

 

i agree again... some would wig out.. but i dont know a single person who would actually stop playing... and as you said when the time came...go to the shop and buy new... I dont know if it should be done...But it could be done... Ive heard others argue that it would kill the game... or kill new club sales... I just dont believe that .... people buy what the stars play... and if anything it would increase sales for a time...

 

It would kill new club sales, no one would willingly spend money on clubs that are shorter than their current club. It would also create all sorts of problems with club and amateur tournaments regarding what equipment was permitted. Will be fun to watch pro tournaments where the pro's can't out drive the best local amateurs, what a joke.

 

 

just dont think so.... people buy blades, 4 wedges, certain shafts, low spin driver heads , etc everyday to the detriment of their game... why ? to play what they think they see on TV... most players dont even know how far they hit a driver....

 

why would it cause an issue with club tournaments? youd have the choice of driver and ball you play now for say a 10 year period ( similar to groove rule) so either way would be legal...

 

as for pros being out driven by best local amateurs...1st... the BEST local amateurs would likely be playing the pro equipment.... 2nd... i thought the pros on TV would be "bombing it" regardless of the ball or driver size.... what with 300 yard 3 woods and all.... so i doubt that this would be the case even if the Best local ams played the hotter equipment.

[bladehunter]

I just don’t get the difference between this and the groove rule. I used to be able to buy wedges that would shave covers of the ball. I could pull a ball back from most any lie if need be and coild count on ground movement side to Side off slopes on a green instead of more curve through the air. But that went away with the rule. And I bought legal grooves. I complained. A lot. But I had no choice.

 

You can say this shouldn’t be done . But I just don’t think that it’s the impossibility you think it is. There are literally no more issues that would arise than did with the groove rule.

[pinestreetgolf]

I just don't get the difference between this and the groove rule.

 

There isn't one. Golf is bifurcated right now. Just wear shorts to your next match in Louisiana in 100 degree heat. Its an advantage the pros don't have. Also, if any of you take carts, you're not playing the same game. Sorry, but you are getting away with being in much worse shape than would otherwise be required to shoot an optimum score.

 

We don't play the same game as the professionals right now. I'm learning this the hard way, as I'm transitioning into "conditions in effect" competitions as my game gets better. You don't think a cart matters? I walked the first day of a no-cart tournament on a 7200 course. The next day my legs were jello. I had to incorporate some training just to be able to walk for three straight days. I'm used to shorts and had to play in long pants for the first time in Louisiana in August. I didn't bring extra gloves. It didn't go great. We are bifurcated right now, whether you want to admit it or not. So no, the guy in the Umbro gym shorts whose taken a cart all day in 102 degree heat who still has the legs to smack a long drive on 17 ain't doing anything like the pros. The physical requirements arn't anywhere near as high.

 

I wonder if High COR drivers would have caught on if they were OEM-made and didn't have cave-in faces. Its one thing to show up with your buddies with a massive green driver with "FELON" stamped on it. Its quite another to show up with the latest Taylormade Made-For-Amateur-Golf High-COR driver with a muted color scheme just like the pro drivers.

[bladehunter]

I just don't get the difference between this and the groove rule.

 

There isn't one. Golf is bifurcated right now. Just wear shorts to your next match in Louisiana in 100 degree heat. Its an advantage the pros don't have. Also, if any of you take carts, you're not playing the same game. Sorry, but you are getting away with being in much worse shape than would otherwise be required to shoot an optimum score.

 

We don't play the same game as the professionals right now. I'm learning this the hard way, as I'm transitioning into "conditions in effect" competitions as my game gets better. You don't think a cart matters? I walked the first day of a no-cart tournament on a 7200 course. The next day my legs were jello. I had to incorporate some training just to be able to walk for three straight days. I'm used to shorts and had to play in long pants for the first time in Louisiana in August. I didn't bring extra gloves. It didn't go great. We are bifurcated right now, whether you want to admit it or not. So no, the guy in the Umbro gym shorts whose taken a cart all day in 102 degree heat who still has the legs to smack a long drive on 17 ain't doing anything like the pros. The physical requirements arn't anywhere near as high.

 

I wonder if High COR drivers would have caught on if they were OEM-made and didn't have cave-in faces. Its one thing to show up with your buddies with a massive green driver with "FELON" stamped on it. Its quite another to show up with the latest Taylormade Made-For-Amateur-Golf High-COR driver with a muted color scheme just like the pro drivers.

 

 

yes.. that was my point... people only think they play the same equipment now as pros.. some here do... but i mean Joe Hack who isnt a gear head... his epic head isnt hotmelted for his prefered bias... doesnt have the red dot adapter for flatter lie angle and it certainly isnt shafted with the same shaft... but the thinks its same.... could easily have pros to play smaller less hot versions of what joe hack can buy on the shelf.. as long as paint jobs and emblems matched 80% of the 99 wouldnt even know... or care. This has been going on with shafts for eons.... How many times ive heard someone ask for the 661 speeder DJ plays in his driver .. tons...and most would argue with you to the death if you told them it wasnt that shaft... its not its just a paint job...

[OrangeGravy]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

 

While that may be true, I feel like the steps needed to get the game where people seem to want it to be would be too drastic. An amateur would wig out if every new driver they tried was 20 yards shorter than what they have.

 

I have no issue with further restrictions to limit future gains. My problem comes when they deem already legal equipment as no longer conforming. Especially when these rules are being made with pros in mind. They are a piece of the pie, but the amateur golfer is the heart of this game. Without them, the game dies.

 

 

 

i agree again... some would wig out.. but i dont know a single person who would actually stop playing... and as you said when the time came...go to the shop and buy new... I dont know if it should be done...But it could be done... Ive heard others argue that it would kill the game... or kill new club sales... I just dont believe that .... people buy what the stars play... and if anything it would increase sales for a time...

 

It would kill new club sales, no one would willingly spend money on clubs that are shorter than their current club. It would also create all sorts of problems with club and amateur tournaments regarding what equipment was permitted. Will be fun to watch pro tournaments where the pro's can't out drive the best local amateurs, what a joke.

 

90% of golfers just buy clubs by brand recognition only. They might hit the club on the range of the mat, but they aren't getting fit on launch monitors like the tiny subset of golfers on this site. I have no horse in this particular race, but if clubs changed only the small number of hardcore golfers would even notice or care. It would otherwise go unnoticed by the golfing masses. I personally still play pretty old stuff because I'm cheap. I'm actually a bit more consistent with the smaller heads of yesterday. 460 cc just doesn't look right. Some of the big driver heads I can deal with like my FT Tour because they aren't all stretched out looking.

 

This issue doesn't really pertain to amateur golf in my mind, just the pro game. There is a risk that the pro game looses viewership if it becomes boring to too many fans. The risk is there no matter what they do or don't do in regards to equipment. If most fans are older and they aren't being replaced at a high enough rate to keep viewership at a sustainable level, golf goes by by on tv or gets scaled way back.

[radiman]

I just don't get the difference between this and the groove rule.

 

There isn't one. Golf is bifurcated right now. Just wear shorts to your next match in Louisiana in 100 degree heat. Its an advantage the pros don't have. Also, if any of you take carts, you're not playing the same game. Sorry, but you are getting away with being in much worse shape than would otherwise be required to shoot an optimum score.

 

We don't play the same game as the professionals right now. I'm learning this the hard way, as I'm transitioning into "conditions in effect" competitions as my game gets better. You don't think a cart matters? I walked the first day of a no-cart tournament on a 7200 course. The next day my legs were jello. I had to incorporate some training just to be able to walk for three straight days. I'm used to shorts and had to play in long pants for the first time in Louisiana in August. I didn't bring extra gloves. It didn't go great. We are bifurcated right now, whether you want to admit it or not. So no, the guy in the Umbro gym shorts whose taken a cart all day in 102 degree heat who still has the legs to smack a long drive on 17 ain't doing anything like the pros. The physical requirements arn't anywhere near as high.

 

I wonder if High COR drivers would have caught on if they were OEM-made and didn't have cave-in faces. Its one thing to show up with your buddies with a massive green driver with "FELON" stamped on it. Its quite another to show up with the latest Taylormade Made-For-Amateur-Golf High-COR driver with a muted color scheme just like the pro drivers.

 

 

yes.. that was my point... people only think they play the same equipment now as pros.. some here do... but i mean Joe Hack who isnt a gear head... his epic head isnt hotmelted for his prefered bias... doesnt have the red dot adapter for flatter lie angle and it certainly isnt shafted with the same shaft... but the thinks its same.... could easily have pros to play smaller less hot versions of what joe hack can buy on the shelf.. as long as paint jobs and emblems matched 80% of the 99 wouldnt even know... or care. This has been going on with shafts for eons.... How many times ive heard someone ask for the 661 speeder DJ plays in his driver .. tons...and most would argue with you to the death if you told them it wasnt that shaft... its not its just a paint job...

 

I'll give you that. That's a valid point. I still don't want to see it happen. But, there are definitely differences in some of their equipment. A lot of it is just further fitting which is available for some of the masses. I say that jealously because there is nothing like that here.

 

I love this game as it is, and I loved it 22 years ago when I played my first round. I don't want to see things get complicated. You've made a lot of valid points and I respect your opinion. I just don't happen to agree with the desired outcome.

 

At the end of the day, I don't know that I trust the USGA to implement whatever they decide in a way that makes sense. But, we shall see I guess.

[radiman]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

 

While that may be true, I feel like the steps needed to get the game where people seem to want it to be would be too drastic. An amateur would wig out if every new driver they tried was 20 yards shorter than what they have.

 

I have no issue with further restrictions to limit future gains. My problem comes when they deem already legal equipment as no longer conforming. Especially when these rules are being made with pros in mind. They are a piece of the pie, but the amateur golfer is the heart of this game. Without them, the game dies.

 

 

 

i agree again... some would wig out.. but i dont know a single person who would actually stop playing... and as you said when the time came...go to the shop and buy new... I dont know if it should be done...But it could be done... Ive heard others argue that it would kill the game... or kill new club sales... I just dont believe that .... people buy what the stars play... and if anything it would increase sales for a time...

 

It would kill new club sales, no one would willingly spend money on clubs that are shorter than their current club. It would also create all sorts of problems with club and amateur tournaments regarding what equipment was permitted. Will be fun to watch pro tournaments where the pro's can't out drive the best local amateurs, what a joke.

 

90% of golfers just buy clubs by brand recognition only. They might hit the club on the range of the mat, but they aren't getting fit on launch monitors like the tiny subset of golfers on this site. I have no horse in this particular race, but if clubs changed only the small number of hardcore golfers would even notice or care. It would otherwise go unnoticed by the golfing masses. I personally still play pretty old stuff because I'm cheap. I'm actually a bit more consistent with the smaller heads of yesterday. 460 cc just doesn't look right. Some of the big driver heads I can deal with like my FT Tour because they aren't all stretched out looking.

 

This issue doesn't really pertain to amateur golf in my mind, just the pro game. There is a risk that the pro game looses viewership if it becomes boring to too many fans. The risk is there no matter what they do or don't do in regards to equipment. If most fans are older and they aren't being replaced at a high enough rate to keep viewership at a sustainable level, golf goes by by on tv or gets scaled way back.

 

Two things. First, they may not get fit on a LM. But, I guarantee that they'll notice they are significantly shorter on the course.

 

Second, maybe golf on TV does need to scale back. It's essentially a year round season. With social media and a dedicated channel, it could just be reaching the point of oversaturation. That being said, there's no equipment change that'll fix that. I feel the NFL is suffering from a similar situation. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. A few months away from pro golf just makes me that much more excited to watch when it comes back.

 

[mahonie]

I can see the ball being the focus of any changes that the USGA/R&A are considering. Perhaps they will try to impose some restrictions on the spin profile of balls. For example, a ball that has high spin around the green also has to have high spin off the tee...a consistent high spin profile. On well-struck tee shots there is little difference to now, but on mishits the ball will curve further offline. You could have a low spin ball that is less-punishing on mishit drives, but doesn’t give you the same level of control around the green. You could then have a mid-spin ball that is somewhere between the two. All balls would be similar in price and you could choose which ball best suits your level of play.

 

This way good ball strikers will still be rewarded for good shots and mishits will be punished for what they are...mishits. The step between spin profiles wouldn’t need to be that great to make a significant difference and I would argue that those types of balls are already on the market to some extent.